Double Bind

Encyclopedia : D : DO : DOU : Double Bind

Double Bind is a communicative situation where a person receives different or contradictory messages. The term, coined by the anthropologist Gregory Bateson attempts to account for the onset of schizophrenia without simply assuming a organic brain dysfunction. Bateson, G., Jackson, D. D., Haley, J. & Weakland, J., 1956, Toward a theory of schizophrenia. (in: 'Behavioral Science', vol.1, 251-264)

The phenomenon itself was functionally observed in its negative sense, and utilised in a therapeutic context, by Milton H. Erickson. The Double bind is based on paradox turned to contradiction.

Contents

1 Explanation
2 Phrase examples
3 Criticism
4 See also
5 External links
6 Notes and references

Explanation

In non-psychological circumstances, the phrase "catch-22" (based on the book of that title) has come into popular use to describe a less formal style of double bind, a cyclical conundrum, or "no-win situation". A Catch-22 situation, like a double bind, is also inherently self-defeating: the very act of trying to solve it prevents it from happening.

A double bind occurs when the following hold true (this is a less formal description, the technical description is given in source references). Because of the nature of his/her situation:

The person must (or cannot) do X.
The person must (or cannot) do Y, which conflicts with X.
Any commentary on the absurdity or untenability of the situation is strictly forbidden.

Thus the essence of a double-bind is two conflicting demands, neither of which can be ignored, which leave the victim torn both ways in such a way that whichever demand they try to meet, the other demand cannot be met. "I must do it but I can't do it" is a typical description of the double-bind experience. It demands that they solve what is (to them) an unsolvable inavoidable problem.

The contradictory message-complex can originate from one or several people. For example, different parents giving different messages, neither of which can be ignored, such as a mother saying one thing ("Why can't you show me affection?"), and by mediating another message through non-verbal communication (Shrinking away from physical contact with child). But there are also situations where several individuals are involved in producing the double bind effect. A subordinate being assigned two contradictory tasks ("Get me some coffee"; "You're not supposed to make coffee, your assignment is to never leave that phone"), is a situation that presupposes two persons in addition to the victim.

The solution to a double-bind is to place the problem in a larger context, a state Bateson identified as Learning III, a step up from Learning II, which requires only learned responses to reward/consequence situations. In Learning III, the double bind is contextualized and understood as an impossible, no-win scenerio. Bateson maintained that in the case of the schizophrenic, the double bind is presented continually and habitually within the family context. By the time the child is old enough to have identified the double bind situation, it has already been internalized and the child is unable to confront it. The solution, then, is to create an escape from the conflicting logical demands of the double bind in the world of the delusional system.

Phrase examples

Have you stopped beating your wife yet? (The implication that the question must receive a yes or no answer creates a double bind; the only answer that will not open the respondent to condemnation is to point out the false premise of the question, that one has previously beaten one's spouse. However, according to the literal meaning of the question, if one had never abused one's wife, the answer "no" would be incorrect, as one could not have stopped performing an action one has never performed.) This is a classic hacker example, to which the answer would be "mu", a disacknowledgement of the statement in hacker culture.
All generalizations are meaningless
A sign saying "do not read this sign"
The command "question authority" (It would be said that by questioning authority, one is forced to acknowledge the primacy of that authority.)
An example of double bind that Bateson alleges could result in schizophrenia would be a family situation in which a child is taunted for being shy until the point when the child yells in frustration. Then, the child is spanked for the outburst. Thus the child learns two contradictory messages: I must express myself to be accepted, and I must not express myself in order to be accepted.

Criticism

Gregory Bateson's double bind theory is very complex and has only been partly tested; there are gaps in the current psychological and experimental evidence that is required to establish causation. Current subjective assessments of individuals, faced with making a serious decision while exposed to conflicting messages, report feelings of anxiety. It is argued that if the double bind theory is to successfully challenge findings that point to a genetic basis for schizophrenia, more comprehensive psychological and experimental studies are needed, with different family types and across various family contexts

External links

Notes and references